Re: [mi] watchpoint-scope exec async command

[Bob Rossi <bob at brasko dot net>]

On Sat, Apr 02, 2005 at 12:50:14PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 09:11:05 -0500
> > From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> > Cc: GDB <gdb@sources.redhat.com>
> > 
> > Actually, I don't think software watchpoints need it at all.  A
> > software watchpoint is implemented primarily by single-stepping the
> > inferior, right?  Well, after every single-step we know whether or not
> > the breakpoint is still in scope...
> 
> That's true, but running the code that checks whether the watchpoint
> is still in scope after each instruction would slow down GDB even
> more, while the scope breakpoint doesn't add any slowdown.
> 
> Of course, this is all based on speculative arguments, at least from
> my side, so it could be 100% wrong.  If someone who reads this knows
> for a fact why scope breakpoints were introduced, please speak up.

Please forgive me for not being able to contribute to the solution to
this problem. 

Eli or Daneil, if either of you can decide which solution is correct,
I'll look into fixing the problem. It just so happens that this bug
doesn't really effect me in any way. I just happened to notice it when
trying to enumerate many of the possibilities in GDB/MI.

Would it be good if I entered a bug report? or should i just forget
about this?

Bob Rossi